West Bengal

Kolkata-I(North)

CC/101/2006

Mithilesh Shaw - Complainant(s)

Versus

Shree Ambey Mobitel and another - Opp.Party(s)

15 Jan 2008

ORDER

Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata - I (North)
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
Web-site - confonet.nic.in
 
Complaint Case No. CC/101/2006
( Date of Filing : 18 Apr 2006 )
 
1. Mithilesh Shaw
S/o Lt. Parmeshwar Shaw, H/No. - 101, Kaladanga Road, P.O. - Fingapara, P.S. - Jagatdal, Dist. 24 Pgs(N) - 743129.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Shree Ambey Mobitel and another
Kankinara Bazar, 14, Kachari Road, Shop no. 3, P.S. - Jagatdal, 24 Pgs(N).
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 15 Jan 2008
Final Order / Judgement

Mithilesh Shaw                                                                          …….     Complainant

vs.

Shree Ambey Mobile and another                                         .……  Opposite parties

 

Present :  Sri A.K. Das,  President

                  Sri L.K. Banerjee,  Member

               

Order no.   10     dt.15.01.2008

 

            Complainant in this consumer complaint has prayed for necessary relief alleging deficiency in service on the part of the o.ps. in the following back drop. Petitioner purchased a mobile set being no.RSLRU 1243672768 at Rs.5654/- on 20.4.05 from o,.p. no.1 with warranty for a period of 12 months from the date of its activation. After six months of the purchase the said mobile set was not functioning properly, as such, he approached the o.p. no.1 and according to their advice he approached to o.p. no.2 for necessary service but the o.ps. did not cooperate nor tendered any service for repairing the mobile set. Hence the petitioner filed this complaint for necessary relief.

            Both the o.ps. have been duly served with the notices of the consumer complaint. O.p. no.2 filed w/v. No w/v is filed on behalf of o.p. no.1. O.p. no.2 has contended in the w/v that the set used by petitioner did not come within any warranty after 31.12.04 and this was clearly communicated / cautioned to the petitioner at the time of purchase. If the petitioner brought the same after such date the petitioner would have brought the same at his own risk. However, the contention of the o.ps. have no bearing in connection with the allegation of the petitioner. No other defence has been alleged by o.ps. against the allegation of the petitioner. Therefore it is evident from the record that the o.ps. committed deficiency in service since they did not repair the mobile set of the petitioner in spite of repeated approach. In view of the fact, the petitioner is entitled to relief and the consumer complaint succeeds and it is awarded in the following terms.

            O.ps. are directed to replace the mobile set bearing no.RSLRU 12436927668  or to refund the price of the set amounting Rs.5654/- (Rupees five thousand six hundred fifty four) only and compensation Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand) only and litigation cost Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) only within two months from date, failing which it will carry an interest @ 8% p.a. till realization.

            Let copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.